Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 381 posts

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#261

Post by [deleted] »

phatfish wrote: post #136
iamnothere wrote: post #100

This is a tired rehash of the same panic we had after 2016. In short: “Oh no, if we allow unrestricted communications, people may turn this into political advantage!” No shit. That’s the point of free speech. As always, the only solution is twofold: (1) end the targeted advertising business model (for everyone , not just Meta) and (2) acknowledge and address the underlying social and economic problems affecting avera…

It's not a release valve, it's a honeypot so the 99% keep blaming each other. Shut it down and something might actually happen in the real world.

[deleted]

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#262

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

scarab92 wrote: post #236
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And of course publish it. Logically we might expect Meta to get into selling narcotics next. "It is not Meta's role to police drug use"

[flagged]

It's disingenuous to try to present all offensive subject matter as "differences of opinion" and objections as politically motivated.

Some subject matter, such as terrorist beheadings, animal abuse, sucker-punching strangers, etc, is just plain illegal and should not be publicized and glorified.

YOU may not agree, but society and the legal system has.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#264

Post by carlosjobim »

windexh8er wrote: post #204
carlosjobim wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This type of comment is why K-12 education in the US really needs to start focusing on skills related to disinformation. The example given here is obviously an art vs disinformation/misinformation/psyops. They aren't the same and conflating them doesn't do anyone any good. Also, Meta does fund these initiatives. They choose who to give money to in these programs. You'd think that money being paid would also mean a hi…

In real life right now and for many years, we have gangster rappers (or drill or trap, whatever you'd like to call it) who are funded by record companies, broadcasted everywhere, and praised by the mainstream. Including being broadcasted and celebrated by public service stations.

In their records they rap about murdering people and raping women, and also threatening to murder specific individuals or bragging about having done such. Among other things.

They are also active on social media, where they also threaten people with violence and death, or brag about such feats.

And finally they also murder people in real life, or get murdered likewise by their peers.

Now for the same person, expressing themselves the same way but on different platforms. For their record company funded content we say "that's art and free speech", and for their social media posts we say "what have you done, Zuckerberg!?".

> Also, Meta does fund these initiatives. They choose who to give money to in these programs.

You are right. I misunderstood the program to be general payments to all creators of size á la Spotify, but it's an invite-only program.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#265

Post by AlexandrB »

wpietri wrote: post #220
asdvsadnvs wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Everyone has the moral obligation to not enable or profit from harm. Do we all live up perfectly to that all the time? No. There's no meaningful moral rule where people can do that. If there were, it wouldn't be worth having as a moral rule. Is Zuckerberg responsible for the harm he's causing? Yes. Are the workers enabling that responsible? Yes. Are the people who profit from indirectly supporting that responsible? Y…

"Harm" is a mushy term that means everything and nothing. There are many competing definitions of "harm" based on one's cultural, religious, and philosophical priors. So what kind of harm are you talking about exactly?

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#266

Post by consensus1 »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #232
wpietri wrote: post #55

> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.

And of course publish it. Logically we might expect Meta to get into selling narcotics next. "It is not Meta's role to police drug use"

The constitution guarantees free speech, but not free drug use (though maybe it should). So I don't see any contradiction here. Meta has every right to police speech as it is a private company, but it has no obligation to do so.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#267

Post by [deleted] »

jklinger410 wrote: post #153
mikeocool wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> appear to be profiting from is "an invitation-only programme that lets you earn money from the performance of your eligible public reels, photos, stories and text posts." The difference between “We ask white nationalists to join our invite only pay-for-views program” and “we commission white nationalists to make content” kinda seems like splitting hairs.

The invitation is automated

[deleted]

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#269

Post by blululu »

koe123 wrote: post #68

Every single time historically we have unregulated media you get a shitshow. I think you can blame our societies nonchalant lassez faire attitude to the propaganda profiteering by American big tech for lots of the issues we face today. Honestly: do cocaine laced recommender algorithms really benefit us? I really hope the EU fully bans this stuff.

My country has had totally unregulated media for 250 years. I'm not sure what other historical examples you have to justify your moral panic, and I understand that more authoritarian societies will struggle with such an approach but I assure you that we have been doing just fine in spite of the occasional chaos.

Re: Controversial creators are benefiting from monetization programs run by Meta

#270

Post by consensus1 »

mc32 wrote: post #92
wpietri wrote: post #55

> "it is not Meta's role to police offensiveness" Just to fund, transmit, amplify, protect, and profit from it.

The egregious part is the amplification part. Profit derives from that. Transmission and protection are neutral and they are necessary for all information especially if there is a history of freedom of expression; though of course some governments and others like regulating permissible expression.

Yes, but that is perfectly ok because we live in a society with not only freedom of speech but also freedom of the press, so it necessarily follows that it is ok to distribute speech that you don't like to a willing audience and also to profit from it. If that isn't ok, then neither is HN or the New York Times.
Post reply on HN